Search

Last night in the CNN/YouTube Republican debate, the candidates were asked what the punishment should be for women if abortion is banned.

The question of “How Much Time Should She Do?” is one that we heard from Anna Quindlen this summer and is now resurfacing once again. Now that the political heat is high, this message – while it’s certainly not new – might just reframe the abortion debate and put conservatives on the defensive for a change.
Pro-choice candidates have consistently been forced by anti-choice rhetoric into positions where they end upcompromising on reproductive rights issues; this is no big news. But asking anti-choice individuals about criminalization isn’t an easy question to answer, as you can see in this video. And as mentioned in the Quindlen article, Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa asked anti-choice Republican Jim Nussle publicly during the 2006 governor’s race the very same question, in which he lost the race to pro-choice Governor Chet Culver.The National Institute for Reproductive Health’s Messaging Project gave PPGI resources for their campaign, which focuses specifically on “How Much Time?” after doing research which showed that this question resonated with the public more than a number of other pro-choice messages. While the majority of Americans are pro-choice, the majority of them aren’t activists and many don’t even consider a candidate’s position on choice to be a priority. But putting criminalization at the forefront of the argument could not only change the debate, but prioritize the public’s expectations in candidates.
Jill also wrote a great piece about this when the Quindlen article came out that asks more than the one question. Last night, the candidates naturally turn the question to the doctors (because you know, the women seeking abortions are too distraught and not mentally well enough to be held responsible). The criminalization of doctors is also being researched by the National Institute in creating effective messaging; because if doctors are put in jail, women won’t have anywhere to go and this country will regress back to dangerous, illegal abortions.
In short, Journey’s question last night is an opportunity to not only reframe the abortion debate, but to reclaim it altogether.
RH Reality Check has more details on the debate.

Today House and Senate Republicans passed a widely unpopular tax bill, sending it to President Trump’s desk to be signed. Though you might not guess it, this bill will directly impact people’s access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services.

Republicans are using tax reform as an opportunity to rollback important components of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) after several unsuccessful attempts to repeal the bill entirely. One major feature of the ACA is its individual health insurance mandate, which penalizes people who are not insured through their employers or through the insurance marketplace. While the penalty may seem unfair, it ensures that as many people as possible enroll in health insurance, making insurance more ...

Today House and Senate Republicans passed a widely unpopular tax bill, sending it to President Trump’s desk to be signed. Though you might not guess it, this bill will directly impact ...

Trump intends to nominate a woman named Penny Young Nance as ambassador-at-large for global women’s issues. As such, she’d be responsible for managing the State Department’s programs to fight gender-based violence and promote women and girls’ educational and economic achievement.

Here’s the problem: Penny Young Nance has made her career standing in the way of girls’ and women’s rights.

Nance is the President and CEO of Concerned Women For America (CWA), an organization whose mission statement says it “protects and promotes Biblical values and Constitutional principles” in America. The group is as far-right as it gets, and Nance is basically a bargain Phyllis Schlafly — a reactionary zealot ...

Trump intends to nominate a woman named Penny Young Nance as ambassador-at-large for global women’s issues. As such, she’d be responsible for managing the State Department’s programs to fight gender-based violence ...

Last week, 45 pardoned Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff who made a name for himself by profiling and abusing Latinxs and immigrants.

The pardon comes after Arpaio was convicted of criminal contempt of court for violating a federal district judge’s order to stop discriminating against Latinos. Trump justified pardoning Arpaio by lauding “his life’s work of protecting the public from the scourges of crime and illegal immigration.”

Here are 15 reasons Trump is wrong and Arpaio deserves to burn in hell.

Arpaio was convicted for systematically targeting and illegally detaining Latinxs at traffic stops. He and his officers routinely violated Latinx’s civil rights, creating an environment of fear and terror in Maricopa County — but that’s only the beginning.
During his ...

Last week, 45 pardoned Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff who made a name for himself by profiling and abusing Latinxs and immigrants.

The pardon comes after Arpaio was convicted of criminal contempt of court for ...

Search

We need your help!

Get Our Newsletter

New posts and Feministing news delivered to your inbox weekly!

Want to write for us?

All Feministing posts are written by the site’s collective of regular columnists and editors. Though we don’t currently accept guest submissions, we have an open platform Community site to which anyone can contribute. We often promote our favorite Community posts on the main site. And Community bloggers who consistently impress us may to be invited to become regular Feministing columnists..